I love this short Youtube clip which ends with this perfect question ... "AND 9/11 wasn't CGI?"

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbB1BzYNVeY

As it is, I realized today by chance that its author ('lemacabre') is indeed a Cluesforum member (since December 2012) but, due to a brainfade of mine, never received notice of his account being activated. I have now mailed him apologizing for the mishap. Here's hoping 'lemacabre' will excuse my sloppy admin slip and join us soon.

I love this short Youtube clip which ends with this perfect question ... "AND 9/11 wasn't CGI?"

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbB1BzYNVeY

As it is, I realized today by chance that its author ('lemacabre') is indeed a Cluesforum member (since December 2012) but, due to a brainfade of mine, never received notice of his account being activated. I have now mailed him apologizing for the mishap. Here's hoping 'lemacabre' will excuse my sloppy admin slip and join us soon.

I found an interesting site that lists the top 25 CGI films and includes a video clip and description of each one. I found #18 very interesting as it describes how they were able to simulate flooding and they simulated the buildings with something called LIDAR models. I'm trying to see if I can recognize that same grayish look that is so recognizable in media clips that appear to be CGI, such as many from Sandy Hook and Boston and of course 9/11. http://www.creativebloq.com/3d-tips/cgi ... ts-1234014

Now I'm am not claiming this guy is a Sim, however I am claiming that he happens to show many telltale signs of being a Sim, most notably cropping, low res pictures, color adjusting, black and white adjustment, backgrounds removed, eerily similar but slightly different faces, etc. Also it seems the only pictures in existence of this man (that I could find) come from pages either linked with the government or Texas University.

Hmm... interesting character this George Kemble Bennet - the man allegedly behind the "Disneyland of Terror"...

'Disaster City':Rescue Workers Train in the Disneyland of Terror

Preparing for Terror Attacks

Bennett leans back in his blue-and-gold armchair, folds his hands together and thinks for a moment. Then he says: "It's possible that Disaster City might seem like a Disneyland to some people. The emergency responders come here and fight a fire, then they fight another fire, and then they break down a concrete wall. Their adrenaline levels rise, and that's completely OK. As long as they learn something in the process, it's not forbidden to have fun."

As far as floods, hurricanes, fires and the like are concerned, rescue teams are usually well prepared nowadays, says Bennett. "But when it comes to terrorism, to exploding buildings, massive pieces of concrete and steel wreckage and massive numbers of victims -- how do you prepare people for something like that?" he asks. "Our emergency responders are being asked to do more and more, and before Disaster City there was no place that offered the possibility of training them for that."

As Real as Possible

More than 70,000 emergency workers come to Disaster City every year, from the United States, Canada and Latin America, as well as from Asia, Australia, Great Britain, Norway and Portugal. They receive training from instructors who have led rescue efforts during real-life disasters, like 9/11, Hurricane Katrina and the earthquake in Haiti. Disaster City is also an open-air laboratory for the scientific community. Engineers from nearby Texas A&M University regularly use the site to test the instruments, sensors and robots they have developed.

Part of the concept of the ghost town is that the staged disasters should feel as real as possible, which explains the children's toys, bicycles, office chairs, odd pair of shoes and mutilated mannequins scattered among the wreckage and ruins of concrete, steel and wood.http://www.spiegel.de/international/spi ... 28557.html

Hardly surprising if Mr Kemble Bennet turns out to be a just another 'Disney cartoon character'.

I decided to do some more digging into this and the more I look the more suspicious this guy becomes. I was able to find a few more images of him, but they still all originate from Texas A&M sites. I decided to take every picture I could find and comparatively analyse his photos. Here's what I have put together: (keep in mind while there are 10 pictures total, 2 are crops, so there are only 8. I put the crops next to each other for easy comparison)https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4f46d ... sp=sharing

This page, "Texas Government Insider" provides 2 of the 8 existing pictures of Bennett (That I could find) And is also apparently a publication of Strategic Partnerships Inc., a company that is "Recognized as being a pioneer in the business of partnering public and private entities for commercial purposes."http://www.spartnerships.com/aboutus.html

Here are some things that "Strategic Partnerships Inc." offers to "companies looking to increase their footprint in the government marketplace":-Procurement consulting-Intelligence gathering-Capture planning-Strategic guidance in accomplishing all government objectives

This is some really shady stuff in my opinion... upon going through all this stuff I was reminded of the Purdue University engineering department fake simulation of the plane impact from 9/11. The video features a simulation of clearly impossible physics, using data that I supposed was passed down from "Upstairs". I started to wonder who would provide the engineers at the school with such phony data for them to spend so much time making animations for? Perhaps a person from Purdue, with a similar position to our pal Kemble here would be able to pass that down, being as he is the "Vice Chancellor of Engineering", whatever the hell that means. Kemble also agrees with the "government version" of the 9/11 events by the way:

"But when it comes to terrorism, to exploding buildings, massive pieces of concrete and steel wreckage and massive numbers of victims -- how do you prepare people for something like that?" he asks.

Yes, how do you prepare people for such an unexpected, spontaneous, incident as 9/11? Well if anyone should know it's you, considering you're one of the only people who SPECIALIZES in these topics:-Emergency management-FEMA-Management-Search and rescue-Terrorism-Urbanhttp://www.spiegel.de/international/spi ... 28557.html

This page also lists a number for Kemble's office, that I was also able to find on another site. I called it. Guess what? It rings for a few minutes then goes dead with a dial tone. No answering machine or anything. I guess I could try emailing him but I don't see that panning out either.

So if I am actually onto something, and ol' Kemble here actually IS a Sim, what are the implications of this? Does this mean that the government could somehow be using it's ties with universities to plant falsely credible identities into the scientific and academic communities? The government often relies on University studies and claims to back up their stories, so wouldn't it be beneficial to to have some "spy-dentities" planted far up the food chain?

So if I am actually onto something, and ol' Kemble here actually IS a Sim, what are the implications of this? Does this mean that the government could somehow be using it's ties with universities to plant falsely credible identities into the scientific and academic communities? The government often relies on University studies and claims to back up their stories, so wouldn't it be beneficial to to have some "spy-dentities" planted far up the food chain?

So if I am actually onto something, and ol' Kemble here actually IS a Sim, what are the implications of this? Does this mean that the government could somehow be using it's ties with universities to plant falsely credible identities into the scientific and academic communities? The government often relies on University studies and claims to back up their stories, so wouldn't it be beneficial to to have some "spy-dentities" planted far up the food chain?

Let me think.... YES!

Actually, you might even be able to find some at your own school, Jason Ford. I know it is daunting and you don't want to get in trouble with university authority but you can try to find out for yourself and protect your fellow students. Some schools have an anti-"CIA invasion" resistance and others don't. You might pay attention to which professors get tenure, which do not, and why. That's just the beginning. There is a long history of the government fucking with education. (Actually education itself is fucked up in general, but that's getting into a whole other topic.)

I think you are definitely onto something here. Just take a look at the pictures you found and the limited 'scope' of this sim's life and you can easily guess how a real person might never have existed behind it. It may have entirely been fabricated and artificially upheld by key employees/agents in the right places.

How easy is it for liars to lie about one more thing? All you have to say to begin a complex lie that few will investigate is to say something like, "Oh I lost my dog when I was 13. We buried it in the yard."

Few have the emotional wherewithal to immediately snap back, "Oh really? I don't believe you. What kind of dog was it?" because it requires a kind of coldness that most trusting, empathetic people are uncomfortable with. Something sympathetic immediately garners attention — perhaps a response more like, "Aw, I'm sorry. What kind of dog was it?"

Same question, different innate trust. The innate trust in the "cold" spectrum can be trained, by the government, for government employees. You may notice when an authority figure is grilling you how their humanity and warmth is suppressed behind their obligation to make sure you are not a lying psycho. This is what border patrols often must do. And even with all their professional training to specifically identify crazies, they are often ridiculously wrong about who to let in and who not to. It's enough to make such employees mad, and I suspect many of them are because they are paid to do the impossible and the stress can be enough to make one give up and just do whatever their authority tells them.

And is that demanding questioning really the correct emotional response to such a heinous and manipulative lie of a born psychopath and/or trained psychopath? This is a moral issue among other issues. It is a deep and complex topic, but showing many people basic evidence that something is a lie is often enough for them to put everything else in place for them. We humans are born with an innate gauge of what is worth our trust and what is not.

You can absolutely be sure the security and arms industries are backing these PsyOps about 100% because it helps them identify holes in their products and their customers' (big Governments, big States (communist, capitalist, whatever), corporate gangs like Monsanto/Xe/Blackwater) needs. And it increases fear and panic in most people not willing to confront such issues. Notice how quickly people steer away from the topic in daily conversation. They are content with 'the War on Terror' because it means they don't have to think about why security products are getting sold way over need. An artificial demand is being created. Arguably, a lot of it is not for the general good but just for the profit of a few.

I want to take the opportunity to use this post to speculate about how or in what way a large crowd could potentially be created using Synthetic Virtual Reality (SVR) technology and appear indistinguishable from Objective Reality (OR) to the Average Human Viewer (AHV).

A crowd is defined as a large number of people gathered together, typically in a disorganized or unruly way.

The essential prerequisite necessary to create a realistic crowd on screen should be to create a realistic looking android. I believe evidence exists to support the hypothesis on the existence of such an artificial screen character, which I will call a Synthetic Virtual Entity (SVE), indistinguishable from OR to the AHV.

I am going to introduce another term, Believability Quotient, (BQ) which can be defined as a scale in which the AHV believes what he is viewing is within the range of known possibility or probability.

For the SVE to reach high on the AHV’s BQ scale and appear indistinguishable from OR, the SVEmust have a story. This is in order to match the crowd’s definition as disorganized and unruly.

A story can be:

SVE is thinking;SVE is walking;SVE is talking to a friend;SVE is talking to himself;SVE is pointing;etc. etc.

These functions can be programmed alone, or in combination, to create an infinite number of possible SVE actions in a crowd.

The computing power needed to generate the minimum number of SVEs necessary to create the illusion of an average crowd should be phenomenal, and beyond the computing power available to any known electronic device in circulation.

What maximizes the AHV's BQ is the belief that what he is seeing is real, and therefore integral. In other words, the AHV will believe the SVE exists not only on the screen, but also out of it, and that the SVE must therefore be real, while the SVE’s existence is only limited by the frame and constraints of the screen presented to him.

Great post, CB. I'm glad to see more discussion about this. I saw many examples of this in Sandy Hook footage and got into many arguments with people about it. I knew it didn't look right though. Thank you for all of the excellent research you've been doing.

At the risk of getting too technical sounding to what you call the AHV (Average Human Viewer), I would suggest we don't slap acronym labels on people. You can just refer to them as humans. Or target audiences. Or people. Or demographics. I know that you are not referring to us but I am touchy about getting all acronym-y about people. Can we please together consider that human beings are not military assets? Otherwise, I like your terminology.

"Maybe it was Rockwell Collins. Maybe something proprietary to a secretive NASA lab. Who knows? The point is this is the usual kind of bad job they do, and the YouTube infiltrators represent the typical harassment and derailment we protect the forum from."

Maybe it was Blender. You guys really need to download it and watch some of the tutorials.

I find the discussion of what exactly it is to be fairly unimportant. But as long as you mention it, and it definitely is interesting to ponder, we noticed in the Vicsim pictures of fake 9/11 victims that CNN (or whomever was using CNN as their cover for releasing the "dead victims of terrorism") was using Photoshop 3.0 lighting on the simulated heads. That is still in the EXIF data of the vicsim pics. Could it be that part of their orders as drones (read: contract military workers) is setting up matching lighting scenarios with whatever source image they get?

For their pseudo-video this would be a potentially time-consuming process. They may spend so much time on things like that, or other arbitrary orders they are told to "prioritize", they don't bother to fix simple render glitches — just hoping better software or patches will come along to match their construction process, rather than matching the construction process to the software available? Seems like a kind of corporate/military thing to do.

"Alright boys, treat the software as if it works how it was designed, cuz that's what we got and that's how you are trained to make the sims."

Rather than helping their drones understand what reality is (or even looks like) might they be simply given the order to "fudge it" as quickly as possible, fulfilling textbook/demographic targets? Might this even be within a "normal" military program that is otherwise unaware of what these special computer wiz kids are doing? Is it a few "extra hours" or "after hours" in a simulation software, quickly ported out through a channel to the media by their supervisor, the rest of their time being a "communications officer" or "radar specialist" or some other easy cover for their access to simulation systems? Perhaps their friends and peers don't even know — can't or wouldn't ask questions. Cliques of power. Everyone knows what happens when you ask questions in the military instead of just following orders. It would kind of explain the lack of frame-by-frame editing. They might not want to make time for it, and they are putting all their eggs in the future notion that frame-by-frame fixing won't be necessary. They'll probably be right one day. Software can improve.

Whatever the reasons or software problems, which make the glitches, they have a dumb system that is easy to see through the moment you notice a seam in their patchwork Matrix. Unfortunately, enough people don't look into it and fall for just about any old Playstation level cartoon cut-out because they won't allow themselves to question the media's story that the news "presents raw video" rather than mouthpieces for the government's simulation of the world.

brianv wrote:"Maybe it was Rockwell Collins. Maybe something proprietary to a secretive NASA lab. Who knows? The point is this is the usual kind of bad job they do, and the YouTube infiltrators represent the typical harassment and derailment we protect the forum from."

Maybe it was Blender. You guys really need to download it and watch some of the tutorials.

I find it hilarious that children can download a free program, learn it and be able to use it to recreate the animations for events like 9/11.I use Blender and spent many hours watching tutorials created by children. It is an excellent program. I have a feeling that future generations will not be so easily duped and enthralled by moving pictures and shiny objects.

What is happening on this forum is only the beginning. More and more of us are 'waking up' to the media deception every day.

brianv wrote:"Maybe it was Rockwell Collins. Maybe something proprietary to a secretive NASA lab. Who knows? The point is this is the usual kind of bad job they do, and the YouTube infiltrators represent the typical harassment and derailment we protect the forum from."

Maybe it was Blender. You guys really need to download it and watch some of the tutorials.

I find it hilarious that children can download a free program, learn it and be able to use it to recreate the animations for events like 9/11.I use Blender and spent many hours watching tutorials created by children. It is an excellent program. I have a feeling that future generations will not be so easily duped and enthralled by moving pictures and shiny objects.

What is happening on this forum is only the beginning. More and more of us are 'waking up' to the media deception every day.

Yes it's an amazing piece of kit, I've been toying with it on and off over the years, most recently about a year ago, when I did an image from a tutorial which took almost a day to render on a 6Core, 64bit machine with 16gigs of RAM, nearly fried it completely. Definitely one of those "I shoulda spent more time on" programs, unfortunately there aren't enough hours in the day!